Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

Ingineer

Electrical Engineer
Aug 8, 2012
1,507
3,699
I've been staying out of this until now, but I would like to point out that wk057's information from the BMS is correct. Each car's BMS is constantly calculating it's real capacity and it's visible right there in the diagnostic screen.

This is also why Tesla does not (willingly) give us access to this information.

Also, if you compare packs across the cars, you quickly see that none of them have identical capacity. Due to manufacturing tolerances, each of the cells ends up with slightly more or less amp-hour capacities. Due to the intelligent design of the packs this generally averages out pretty nicely, so the actual difference in practice is small, and quickly is lost in the noise of how the pack is treated under use. However, if owners had access to this data, people would be constantly up in arms when comparing cars. It's also true that as time goes on the cells being manufactured get better and have more capacity. So an early "90" pack usually had noticeably less capacity when new than it's more recently manufactured versions. It doesn't feel good when you find out you got one of the "duds".

On top of all this they are also introducing other things most people have no idea about, for instance the newer versions of some packs have significantly more output current capability than earlier ones. This has a great impact on performance. Tesla doesn't tell us about this.

They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

Don't ask me for specific data, I'm not going to give it. I just want to point out that I Love Tesla, and support their mission, but I think this is not the right way to do things. It's fine if they want to impose a launch limit, but they need to INFORM owners of this!

I also believe it's fine to round the numbers on capacity a bit, as well as have the bottom discharge buffer. Most ICE cars don't let you use all the fuel in the tank either, they mount the intake tube off the bottom a bit to avoid sucking in the sediment that ends up there. Totally OK. What's not ok is using this "fudge factor" for marketing wank. They should have been consistent with the software limited 60. Also, they should call the models "65, 75, 90, etc" but leave off the kWh designation. In the official specs, maybe in fine print, state the approximate usable kWh for those of us that expect numbers not to lie. Right there on the front of all packs is a label proudly stating a kWh capacity value that it can never achieve.

Tesla has some amazing engineering and has managed to succeed against crazy odds. Trust is already thin though. It would be an awesome change for a large company to buck the trend and start being honest with it's customers and begin building an organization we can all TRUST. The value of that in the future will be worth billions. Stop with the dishonest fabricated stats, stop permitting employees in the service centers from lying to customers. INTEGRITY will be a welcome change. Instead I am saddened to see all the Tesla has built thus far slowly sliding down in to the slimy muck territory that we experience while owning other brands. Tesla's ownership experience has convinced me to avoid doing business with them in the future (unless something changes). I love the cars, and own/have owned quite a few, but I am now only buying them salvage after Tesla has disowned them. I have only ever purchased one new from Tesla, and it was such a poor experience overall, I don't think I will consider it ever again until they clean up their act.

I believe the success of Tesla's mission is in jeopardy if they don't make some changes now. It would be sad to see all this come crumbling down.

Fix customer communication.
Fix the service experience.
Make service software, information, and parts available to all owners.

A true mass market success depends on this!
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,393
Ithaca, NY
Excellent post, Ingineer!

They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

This is the most disturbing information I've seen in this thread. Though I don't launch a heck of a lot, I know there are many that do. I don't think any of us (without access to the internal data or access to internal company information) would have even considered that possibility.

While I agree this is shady practice and dishonest behavior, I'm not sure Tesla warning people at this point would do a heck of a lot to make that any better with respect to current owners. (They could clearly make it better for potential owners, as the potential owners would then know what they are purchasing.) For those of us who already own the cars, this is another example of selling us one thing (a car with unlimited launches) and delivering something else entirely!


Don't ask me for specific data, I'm not going to give it.

I'm not asking for specific data with respect to number of launches, etc., but are you able to share which packs and models are limited the most, or is that also too specific information? Or does the pack model and build date (early, late, etc.) not matter? Above you had written "on some packs", which is why I ask. You could have meant "some packs, owned by people who launch a lot", or you could have meant "some packs, like all the 85s, early 90s, Ludicrous upgraded 85s, etc.)

I'm definitely not asking you to share anything you're not comfortable sharing. Just asking for a little clarification, and any additional info you can provide.

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden

qwk

P130DL
Dec 19, 2008
3,024
766
I've been staying out of this until now, but I would like to point out that wk057's information from the BMS is correct. Each car's BMS is constantly calculating it's real capacity and it's visible right there in the diagnostic screen.

This is also why Tesla does not (willingly) give us access to this information.

Also, if you compare packs across the cars, you quickly see that none of them have identical capacity. Due to manufacturing tolerances, each of the cells ends up with slightly more or less amp-hour capacities. Due to the intelligent design of the packs this generally averages out pretty nicely, so the actual difference in practice is small, and quickly is lost in the noise of how the pack is treated under use. However, if owners had access to this data, people would be constantly up in arms when comparing cars. It's also true that as time goes on the cells being manufactured get better and have more capacity. So an early "90" pack usually had noticeably less capacity when new than it's more recently manufactured versions. It doesn't feel good when you find out you got one of the "duds".

On top of all this they are also introducing other things most people have no idea about, for instance the newer versions of some packs have significantly more output current capability than earlier ones. This has a great impact on performance. Tesla doesn't tell us about this.

They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

Don't ask me for specific data, I'm not going to give it. I just want to point out that I Love Tesla, and support their mission, but I think this is not the right way to do things. It's fine if they want to impose a launch limit, but they need to INFORM owners of this!

I also believe it's fine to round the numbers on capacity a bit, as well as have the bottom discharge buffer. Most ICE cars don't let you use all the fuel in the tank either, they mount the intake tube off the bottom a bit to avoid sucking in the sediment that ends up there. Totally OK. What's not ok is using this "fudge factor" for marketing wank. They should have been consistent with the software limited 60. Also, they should call the models "65, 75, 90, etc" but leave off the kWh designation. In the official specs, maybe in fine print, state the approximate usable kWh for those of us that expect numbers not to lie. Right there on the front of all packs is a label proudly stating a kWh capacity value that it can never achieve.

Tesla has some amazing engineering and has managed to succeed against crazy odds. Trust is already thin though. It would be an awesome change for a large company to buck the trend and start being honest with it's customers and begin building an organization we can all TRUST. The value of that in the future will be worth billions. Stop with the dishonest fabricated stats, stop permitting employees in the service centers from lying to customers. INTEGRITY will be a welcome change. Instead I am saddened to see all the Tesla has built thus far slowly sliding down in to the slimy muck territory that we experience while owning other brands. Tesla's ownership experience has convinced me to avoid doing business with them in the future (unless something changes). I love the cars, and own/have owned quite a few, but I am now only buying them salvage after Tesla has disowned them. I have only ever purchased one new from Tesla, and it was such a poor experience overall, I don't think I will consider it ever again until they clean up their act.

I believe the success of Tesla's mission is in jeopardy if they don't make some changes now. It would be sad to see all this come crumbling down.

Fix customer communication.
Fix the service experience.
Make service software, information, and parts available to all owners.

A true mass market success depends on this!
Exactly. Car is worth owning, company is definitely not worth messing with. That's why the demand sucks until they pull another demand lever. Unfortunately there are only so many demand levers.

Unless something changes drastically, they are going to forever remain a niche manufacturer.
 

apacheguy

S Sig #255
Oct 21, 2012
5,085
1,246
So Cal
@Ingineer - WRT reducing launch current, are you referring to the DU overheating? Sometimes in my non P 85 I see the dashed limiter line appear on the power gauge after doing a few consecutive launches.
 

Muzzman1

Member
Feb 8, 2014
622
955
Los Angeles
I've been staying out of this until now, but I would like to point out that wk057's information from the BMS is correct. Each car's BMS is constantly calculating it's real capacity and it's visible right there in the diagnostic screen.

This is also why Tesla does not (willingly) give us access to this information.

Also, if you compare packs across the cars, you quickly see that none of them have identical capacity. Due to manufacturing tolerances, each of the cells ends up with slightly more or less amp-hour capacities. Due to the intelligent design of the packs this generally averages out pretty nicely, so the actual difference in practice is small, and quickly is lost in the noise of how the pack is treated under use. However, if owners had access to this data, people would be constantly up in arms when comparing cars. It's also true that as time goes on the cells being manufactured get better and have more capacity. So an early "90" pack usually had noticeably less capacity when new than it's more recently manufactured versions. It doesn't feel good when you find out you got one of the "duds".

On top of all this they are also introducing other things most people have no idea about, for instance the newer versions of some packs have significantly more output current capability than earlier ones. This has a great impact on performance. Tesla doesn't tell us about this.

They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

Don't ask me for specific data, I'm not going to give it. I just want to point out that I Love Tesla, and support their mission, but I think this is not the right way to do things. It's fine if they want to impose a launch limit, but they need to INFORM owners of this!

I also believe it's fine to round the numbers on capacity a bit, as well as have the bottom discharge buffer. Most ICE cars don't let you use all the fuel in the tank either, they mount the intake tube off the bottom a bit to avoid sucking in the sediment that ends up there. Totally OK. What's not ok is using this "fudge factor" for marketing wank. They should have been consistent with the software limited 60. Also, they should call the models "65, 75, 90, etc" but leave off the kWh designation. In the official specs, maybe in fine print, state the approximate usable kWh for those of us that expect numbers not to lie. Right there on the front of all packs is a label proudly stating a kWh capacity value that it can never achieve.

Tesla has some amazing engineering and has managed to succeed against crazy odds. Trust is already thin though. It would be an awesome change for a large company to buck the trend and start being honest with it's customers and begin building an organization we can all TRUST. The value of that in the future will be worth billions. Stop with the dishonest fabricated stats, stop permitting employees in the service centers from lying to customers. INTEGRITY will be a welcome change. Instead I am saddened to see all the Tesla has built thus far slowly sliding down in to the slimy muck territory that we experience while owning other brands. Tesla's ownership experience has convinced me to avoid doing business with them in the future (unless something changes). I love the cars, and own/have owned quite a few, but I am now only buying them salvage after Tesla has disowned them. I have only ever purchased one new from Tesla, and it was such a poor experience overall, I don't think I will consider it ever again until they clean up their act.

I believe the success of Tesla's mission is in jeopardy if they don't make some changes now. It would be sad to see all this come crumbling down.

Fix customer communication.
Fix the service experience.
Make service software, information, and parts available to all owners.

A true mass market success depends on this!

If possible @Ingeineer can you chime in over here:
This is only for owners that care about launching their cars | Tesla Motors
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,393
Ithaca, NY

Why link to a post that is on a different site? That thread started by linking back to Ingineer's post here. This issue probably warrants its own thread, but it should be here, on TMC, not on the Tesla-run site.

Edit: Just noticed that it was lolachampcar, whom I respect greatly, that started the thread on the Tesla site. I'm guessing he must have had his reasons for doing this, so...
 

lolachampcar

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2012
5,599
4,799
WPB Florida
Andy,

I cross post interesting stuff from here to there every now and then. There are some on TM that seldom if ever visit TMC. I read Muzz's post as an invite for Ing to chime in on TM if he was interested.

No offense meant.
 

AWDtsla

Active Member
Mar 3, 2013
4,266
3,960
NE
Details on the launch limitation would be appreciated. If it's a pack problem I doubt it's launches but time spent at max amps. I don't launch that often, but I do often hit max amps.
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,393
Ithaca, NY
Andy,

I cross post interesting stuff from here to there every now and then. There are some on TM that seldom if ever visit TMC. I read Muzz's post as an invite for Ing to chime in on TM if he was interested.

No offense meant.

No problem! (Please see my edit above, if you hadn't already.)

My only concern is that now I have to check both sites! :)
 

Andyw2100

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2014
6,542
2,393
Ithaca, NY
I don't think we know this yet. My interpretation was that this is a temporary limitation affecting consecutive launches.

Actually I inferred, from what ingineer wrote, that it was a limitation on the total number of launches on the pack.

He indicated that there was no notification from Tesla about the limitation. The temporary limiting is shown on the display.

Also, the language he used talking about it being shady, etc. was relatively strong language. I don't think temporary and clearly necessary limitations would have evoked such strong language from ingineer.
 

Ingineer

Electrical Engineer
Aug 8, 2012
1,507
3,699
It is a literal counter. It's not related to thermals. I don't (yet) have any exact data on which packs have the counter enabled and what increments it. Tesla has literally told owners that complain that it's put in to "protect driveline components". This would be acceptable only IF THEY DISCLOSED IT up front! On top of this, they have also stated that upgrading to a P100DL will remove this limitation. Hmm....
 

MP3Mike

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2016
15,863
35,523
Oregon
It is a literal counter. It's not related to thermals. I don't (yet) have any exact data on which packs have the counter enabled and what increments it. Tesla has literally told owners that complain that it's put in to "protect driveline components". This would be acceptable only IF THEY DISCLOSED IT up front! On top of this, they have also stated that upgrading to a P100DL will remove this limitation. Hmm....

@Ingineer So what happens when you hit this mysterious limit? (Can you no longer launch? Is launch power limited to 400kW? Is power limited in a take-over attempt at highway speeds?)

To be clear is it a x launches in y minutes limit, or is it a z number of launches ever limit?
 

Saghost

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2013
8,217
7,010
Delaware
It is a literal counter. It's not related to thermals. I don't (yet) have any exact data on which packs have the counter enabled and what increments it. Tesla has literally told owners that complain that it's put in to "protect driveline components". This would be acceptable only IF THEY DISCLOSED IT up front! On top of this, they have also stated that upgrading to a P100DL will remove this limitation. Hmm....

Interesting. If it's protecting driveline components, and the P100DL doesn't have it, I wonder what they changed about the powertrain in the P100DLs?

Prior to this I assumed it was just a P90D with a bigger pack of different design (including the active Ludicrous capable fuse, of course.)
 

jeffro01

Active Member
Jan 30, 2013
2,692
1,958
Teller County CO
They are also taking away output current after too many launches on some packs. So if you do too many launches, you may suddenly find your car's performance reduced, with no indication from the car or Tesla, and no advance notice that this could happen. This is shady dishonest behavior in my opinion.

No, what's shady and dishonest is to make a claim like this and then immediately state you're not going to back it up. I absolutely and completely call BS on this claim. If you're going to openly slander Tesla then have the guts to back it up.

This is absurd...

Jeff
 

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top